John Bagot (c1275-c1333)
}} ''Collections for a History of Staffordshire, Volume 11'' "it has been shown that John Bagot succeeded his father William before November 1290. The Assize Roll of 21 E. I. (1293) names all the Coroners who had acted in that capacity since the Iter of the Justices, and who were answerable for the effects of felons; amongst these it mentions William Bagot of Bromlegh, who had died and for whom his heir, John Bagot, is answerable. In other cases, when the heir was the son of the deceased, this fact is stated in the Record, and as it was not done in this case, it might be supposed at first sight that John was no the son of Sir William: all doubt on this subject, however, is dispelled by the following deeds at Blithfield. *1 An Indenture of 21 E. I. (1293), between Hawyse, the relict of Sir William Bagod of Bromley Bagot, and John, her son, relative to a dispute between them respecting sales of wood in Brumley, witnessed by Alured de Solenye, Ralph the Clerk, Stephen de Brocholes, Nicholas de Hull, Hugh the Clerk and others. *2 A deed of 2o E. I. (1292), by which Sibil, the daughter of Sir William Bagod of Bromley Bagod, quits claim to John Bagod, her brother all her right in lands and tenements which her brother, William Bagod, held by gift of his father in Bromley Bagod, witnessed by Ralph de Montjoie, Alured de Soleney, and others. This John Bagot occurs as both plaintiff and defendant in several lawsuits in the reign of Edward I. which will be found in Vol. VII of the Stafforshire Collections, but they contain nothing of interset - one mentions a brother, Hugh Bagot. At the Assizes held at Stafford in 21 E. I. (1293), the Jury of the Hundred presented that John Bagod of Bromlegh, Richard de Cavereswall, Geoffrey de Wasteneys, Philip de Chetwynde, Ralph de Dokeshay and John Grym held full Knight's Fees and are of full age - but are not knights - they were therefore in misiericordia, and as the Jury had at first concealed these facts, they were also in misericordia, i.e. at the mercy of the Court for any Fine that might be imposed upon them. At Trinity term, 35 E. I. (1307), John de Mountjoye gave 20s. for licence of Conford with John Bagot and Lucy, his wife, gave a mark for licence of Conford with John de Mountjoye This John de Mountjoye obtained a feoffment in Bromley Bagot, for, by a deed dated 1306, John Bagot, lord of Bromley Bagod, granted to John de Cannockbury, called Pecok, of Bromley Abbatis, four acres in Haukeshill near the land of John de Mountjoye. The other third of the manor must have been held in dower at the date by Hawyse the widow of Sir William Bagot.. This Fine was enrolled at Easter term 1 E. II. (1308)l the terms of it two parts of the manor of Bromley Bagot was settled on John Bagot and Lucy, for their lives, with remainder to the right heirs of John: the presence of John de Mountjoye as sole feoffee in the Fine makes it probable that Lucy was Mountjoye. This family were lords of Yeldersley, Locko and Spondon in Derbyshire. In 1316, the Sheriffs of English counties were ordered to return the names of all cities and vills (manors) within their counties, and the lords of them. This return is known as the 'Nomina Villarum' and has been printed - it names John Bagot as the lord of Bromley Bagot. The object of the return was to raise additional forces for the Scotch war. in 3 E. II (1329) a special Commission was issued to make enquiry touching the persons who with Walter de Rideware, John de Rideware, Robert de Rideware, John de Wolseleye, Henry de Tappeleye, John Bagot, John de Draicote, and others named, had entered the free chaces of Henry, Earl of Lancaster, at Doffield, co. Derby, and Nedwode, co. Stafford, and his parks at Adgaresley, Roulegh, Hanbury, Barton and Tuttebury, co. Stafford, and had driven and taken his deer and assaulted his servants. John Bagot was dead at Easter term 8 E. III (1334), for at that date Margaret, the widow of Sir Geoffrey de Gresley, sued Ralph, the Baron of Stafford, to give up to her the custody of the heir and lands of John Bagod of Bromley Bagod, which belonged to her, as John had held his land of her by knight's service. Ralph did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to distrain and produce him at the following term. At Trinity term of the same year the suit was made a 'remanet,' as the defendant was in the King's service in Scotland. No further notice of this suit occurs, nor was it worth prosecuting, as the heir attained his majority very shortly afterward. There are many deeds of this John Bagot at Blithfield, but none of them are sealed with a coat of arms, nor is he ever styled a knight. For these Deeds see Nos. 50 to 62 in the Appendix. At this date knighthood was compulsory in every man who possessed a full Knight's Fee, and he must have obtained exoneration from it for some special reason. There were many men in former days who had not the physical strength to bear the great weight of armour carried at this period by a knight or man-at-arms." Notes and references